COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS – CLICK HERE


Massachusetts Supreme Court rules that thousands of home foreclosures are invalid because banks do not have promissory notes

by Ethan A. Huff

Global Research, October 25, 2011

More than five million US homeowners and counting have had their homes foreclosed upon by banks since the “economic crisis” first began several years ago. But the Massachusetts Supreme Court recently ruled that the vast majority of the foreclosures that took place in the Commonwealth (and likely in most other states) within the past five years are illegitimate because the banks did not, and do not, actually hold the promissory notes for the properties.

This means that all mortgage payments made to banks for illegitimately foreclosed upon properties are fraudulent since such banks do not technically own the properties in question. It also means that anyone who purchased a foreclosed property, or who is threatened currently with potential foreclosure, does not necessarily have a legal obligation to continue paying their mortgage.

Even homeowners who do not face foreclosure are not necessarily required to continue paying their mortgages — if their lenders are unable to produce valid promissory notes showing true ownership of the property. Then those who follow through with mortgage payments to such lenders are technically participating in fraud because there is no way to verify whether or not mortgage payments are going to the true note holders, or even who the true note holders are in the first place.

“In essence, the ruling [upholds] that those who had purchased a foreclosure property that had been illegally foreclosed upon (which is virtually all foreclosure sales in the last five years), did not in fact have title to the property,” writes The Daily Bail. “Given the fact that more than two-thirds of all real estate transactions in the last five years have also been foreclosed properties, this creates a small problem.”

Recognizing that the federal government’s bailout plan was beneficial only to banks and not homeowners, Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio told those facing foreclosure back in 2009 to “be squatters in [their] own home” ( Now that these foreclosures have been exposed as largely fraudulent, it turns out that her advice was sound.

“Radical though it may seem, we believe the only way to stop the chaos of fraud and the breakdown of the rule of law in our courts, and most importantly to ensure that we ourselves are not participants in the fraud, is for homeowners who can afford their mortgage to stop paying it,” says The Daily Bail.

Global Research Articles by Ethan A. Huff

20 Responses

  1. […] Like this: Like Be the first to like this post. Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor,Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: | bankruptcy, borrower, countrywide, Deeds, disclosure,foreclosure, foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense, foreclosures, fraud, LIENS, LOAN MODIFICATION, Massachusetts Real Estate Law, modification, Mortgage Crisis, mortgages, quiet title, Real Estate Litigation, rescission, RESPA, securitization, TILA audit, title defects, title insurance, trustee, WEISBAND « THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE […]

  2. […] THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE Posted on October 26, 2011 by Neil Garfield […]

  3. @Ian

    Back in 2009 I wrote a simple letter to William P Foley CEO
    of Fidelity national Title , former Chair of LPS
    “what went wrong that your NY attorney Frank Malone finds himself fighting for a Forged Deed?”


    Fidelity and its entities are big on fraud. and arent they the ones that now own Chicago Title?

  4. johngault- funny you mention lenders’ insurance policies paying off to the “lender” when a loan defaults. Scroll back through ANONYMOUS’ posts for some info on insurance fraud. I was just on Chicago Title website late last night, I had intended to research lenders’ policies, there are numerous headings, but none deal with how a lender collects payments on a loan when it defaults. I know that insurance kicks in when a loan goes 91 days past due, that’s why manufactured defaults/dual track foreclosures are so prevalent. The “modification” process, whereby the “lender” demands your signature so that they have something to wave around in the air during foreclosure, is also done with insurance payout in mind.
    This is important- If you have noticed that your loan number has changed from assignment to assignment, so that you have, say, 6 loan numbers for a purchase mortgage and one refi, the extra 4 loan numbers were used to defraud Fannie,Freddie, or insurance cos. If you can dig up any relevant lenders’ insurance policy info, I would greatly appreciate it also.

  5. @johngault,

    Excellent point. Except that lenders didn’t really abide by the 80% rule. They lent 100% and to make it appear as though you had put something down, they got a 20% loan that served as a “down payment” for the remaining 80% you were borrowing. That’s what they did for me. I never paid any PMI since right off the bat, I had told the guy I wouldn’t buy a house if I had to pay pmi in addition to everything else. He still wanted so much to close that he “cleverly” circumvented the rules.

    I have the feeling many of them did that. Anything to make a sale. In fact, a realtor friend of mine was recently telling me that, between 2005 and 2008, she hardly saw any pmi on closing docs even when people brought nothing down. Most of the time, the MO was the same: no money down, clever solution of either an open line of credit or a small balloon of 20% serving as a down payment and most of the closing costs included in the purchase price so that the buyer would have very little to bring to the table. That was the best way for lenders to hook any subprime since those people didn’t have a pot to piss in in the first place. The only time she saw pmi is when people bought condos or houses directly from the developpers: then, pmi was a requisite.

    Thinking about it, it is unbelievable how far that fraud really went!!!

  6. I’ve always opined that loan ‘modification’ is really a subsidy. A true modification would involve 86ing the old note and creating a new one, not some servicer/bankster-driven confirmation of an existing but legitimately unproveable debt or what may actually be a new one. I’m wondering today if one of the reasons we’re all told our loan has to be in default to “modify” is so the bankster can collect on private mortgage insurance (pmi) on the loan. Every single loan over 80% loan to value had mortgage insurance for the ‘lender’s” benefit, and the borrower got to pay for it. I have more questions than answers. We need these answers.

    To the best of my knowledge, no bankster is absolving any principal. Under ‘modification’, a forty year loan might be made on a property with a balloon due many years down the road. How is this insured? It must not be, (jerkies already collected when you defaulted on your own or they told you you had to be in default to be considered for modification).

    So, is the mortgage insurance which was placed on individual loans at origination a reason you’re told to default? So the bankster can collect the mortgage insurance? What a racket. They could conceivably tell you to default, collect the mortgage insurance, and then tell the borrower to pound sand, which is what they do most of the time. Plus they got billions in HAMP funds. So I guess I am once again IMPLORING any attorneys reading here to find paths to discovery. We NEED this pmi info as well as we all know what else. If you attorneys don’t have time, can’t you hire 3rd year law students? Imagine just for a moment what this would all look like with REAL discovery. Tell me where to send my contribution.


    More truth that will get us so freeeeeeeeeeee!!!

    Here’s the scoop: if you’re going to divulge insider trading information, DO IT FOR THE MONEY and make a real killing. SEC is willing to forgive you if you score big. If, on the other, you do it out of loyalty to your friends and you make nothing out of it, SEC wants to talk to you.

  8. Anyone wants to start a petition to the white house with me?

    We need 25,000 signatures for Obama to look at it but here are the key points I want to make:

    1. Prosecute the bankers who obscenely profited from bail outs while fraudulently foreclosing on American homeowners.
    2. Fire Geithner and replace him by William Black.
    3. Fire DeMarco and replace him by Krugman
    4. Remove Dimon and all other bankers from every government agency they are currently sitting in
    5. Dismantle TBTF and appoint Reisch to handle that part, along with Krugman and Black (team of economists. More brainpower, better result)
    6. Confiscate all monies paid for the bailouts and invest it into fixing real estate and housing debacle (including land records)

    I’m going to type it and send it. I’ll post the site here for people to sign it. We don’t know what will come out of it, if anything but what we know is that, if we don’t even try, nothing will come out of anything. Period.

  9. This is not legal advice. Find a qualified attorney in your state. You must ANSWER a foreclosure action against you if it is in a judicial state within 30 days of receiving the complaint against you. Your attorney will tell you what document to use to do the Answer–i.e., answer, motion to dismiss, etc.

  10. I bet you if Israeli homeowners needed a bailout our government would give it to them in a heartbeat.

  11. No moral sense, greed, no ethics, must be a Harvard thing… But heads are starting to fall even there. Jamie, my boy, have you started to pack yet? Remember, you won’t need much in jail. They (we) supply everything: clothes, tooth brush, soap.

  12. Cute title, Neil. That thing about the truth making us free, do you have a timeframe or something? I’m getting so much truth my head is spinning. Yet, I ain’t getting any freeer…

  13. Astoria Federal S & L’s attorney admitted in New York Supreme Court in 2008 that it did not own my two condos when they sold them and it was indemnify IndemnIfy, Indemnify BUT corrupt Frank P Malone of Fidelity National Title and corrupt David K Fiveson of Coronet Title did not want to indemnify the forged deeds they insured and instead paid a bribe to Judge Alice Schlesinger to rule against the US Supreme Court case of Elliot v. Piersol .

    And these crooks are still in possession of my two condos.

    Nemo Dat Rule being in the headlines,( that you cannot give something you don’t own ) shows that Judge Schlesinger is not only at war with the US Constitution but apparently was asleep when she was taught the Nemo Dat rule in law school.

    And if she is paid the right price Judge Schlesinger doesn’t give a damm what out Constitution or the law says.

    Truth vs. Bribes

    The truth is I have always be the true owner of these two condos.

  14. So, if someone buys a foreclosed property and starts making payments to “a bank”, then wouldn’t you be able to sue that party for illegally occupying the house?

  15. all great and dany everyone preaching to the choir. i am going to be the true devils advocate here. if i get served tomorrow and have to go to court to defend my foreclosure. where i do i stand. i am still going to lose. i live in florida. i have a fraudulent appraisal, the broker used reverse underwriting because i was a distance buyer (i didnt manually fill out the mortgage application i have proof i maile dher my paycheck stubs but did not use them to calculate my mothly income. she stated what I HAD to make to be approved and it was the last paper handed to me at closing). i alsredy sign all the papers when i saw the application.) then to add fuel to t he fire wells fargo told me not to pay to apply for a hamp loan in 2010 . did the rules change or were they just trying to get me out of my house sooner then later???

    so as the devils advocate all how does this help me in foreclosure court. we need difinitives please. we need support. i am trully scared. i do not have mers. i

  16. @Emmanuel,

    Recurrent theme on this site. Garfield has a problem checking his sources and crediting the proper ones…

  17. Thank you for the post… however, those quotes, and the themes echoed in the article do not come from the dailybail (although the article is also posted there) – they originated here:

  18. More Truth…. or as the Police sang it back in ’78 “Truth hits everybody….”

    TUESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2011

    Senator Kelly Ayotte stumbles over Occupy Wall Street, FRM Ponzi and Mortgage Fraud questions at Nashua Town Hall meeting.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: